My vote would be on not introducing additional properties for columns
breaks, from an implementation/performance perspective. From a html/css
author point of view, I would prefer to not mix up column and pages as
it makes it unclear how to use the property. How about mixing it up in
the values instead, so instead of having
"page-break-<whatever>:<value>" and
"column-break-<whatever>:<value>"
we would have
"break-<whatever>:<page-value>|<column-value>".
For example: "break-inside: page", "break-inside:column",
"break-inside:any", "break-inside:none", etc.
I think this would be less ambiguous to the user as well as allow for an
efficient implementation. This is roughly what is already proposed, with
the difference that the wording "page-" be removed from the property
name and used in the property values instead. Haven't really considered
how these properties are used though.
Regards,
Em2 Solutions AB
Michael Jansson
HÃ¥kon Wium Lie wrote:
> Also sprach Philip TAYLOR:
>
> > > It should also be noted that using the page-* propoerties to set
> > > preferences on columns is not ideal. However, introducing three new
> > > properties to describe column behavior seems excessive.
> >
> > I don't agree. A page is a page and a column is a column.
> > Adding "column-break-<whatever>" seems to me to be both
> > necessary and sufficient, and /infinitely/ preferable to
> > overloading "page-break-<whatever>" as currently proposed.
>
> To infinity, and beyond! :)
>
> I can go both ways on this. The current draft is a result of this
> discussion:
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2007Dec/0046.html
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2007Dec/0053.html
>
> -h&kon
> HÃ¥kon Wium Lie CTO Â°Ã¾eÂ®Âª
> howcome@opera.com http://people.opera.com/howcome
>
>